JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Opinion:After buying and trying the Zuiko 7/14 2.8 I wanted and had to consider this optics. Let's say the first difference between Pana and Zuiko is mm. Then the optics are equal in terms of sharpness, although the Zuiko would seem sharper than the average values. But what made me understand which of the two to choose are the flare.il panaleic is almost free of reflection of any kind, the Zuiko was just a little light or side light and Ghost and flare were never missing. As quality the Zuiko would seem to have done better has a distance scale , it has a button to be able to assign any command species with an Olympus M1 mk2, it is in fact a 14/28, and has a constant diaphragm of 2.8.The panaleica does not have all these things but goes straight to the bottom, images with the Leica timbre, sharp , does not suffer or suffer from flare ne of Ghost is a 16/36 and you can mount the filters. I must tell the truth I found a hair of difference how sharpness the Zuiko is ahead, but closing in a little mid diaphragm are identical. Summarizing ,everything written so far by other reviews are consistent with this optics. What to say cost and not little I preferred to put something back because the Zuiko I had bought new and the Pana used but great, but what convinced me at the change useless repeat it are the reflections that on the Pana are almost non-existent. I'll finish by giving a nice 10 to that optics and as soon as I get to try it more I'll update you. Yes after taking a few photos I have to say that it is a good lens but does not convince me at all,creates several halos in particular circumstances and the sharpness at the edges I do not like,the Zuiko was better. Maybe I don't have a feeling with zoom optics I'm thinking of a fixed staying in the Leica house,we'll see.vote 6.
Pros:Solid construction and tropicalization, made superb.
Cons:The price even if justified by the quality. I would have liked it less voluminous... but it's wanting to look for the hair in the egg.
Opinion:I don't use these focal points much also because my (few) wide-angle zoom experiences had never been satisfactory. I wanted to try this lens and I was amazed: the yield is exceptional to all the focal points and openings. What I appreciated the most besides the excellent sharpness that even in the edges is not bad for a wide-angle is the rendering of colors and microcontrast. I feel compelled to advise you with my eyes closed.
Pros:Excellent construction, internal zoom, excellent sharpness already at full aperture even at the edges, weight
Cons:High price also on used
Opinion:With the passage to M43 I heard from the beginning the lack of the Canon 16-35/4 L I used on 6d. I took it in replacement of the Olympus 9-18 which I always found too soft at the edges except when you close the diaphragm a lot, too dark for the street and too little sharp at the edges for the landscape. This 8-18 in addition to having an extra stop offers much more sharpness at the expense of more generous dimensions even if it is still contained if you think about the focal and brightness hike. The construction then is at the top. I no longer regret the Canon 16-35/4 L although at great magnification the difference can only be there, as it is normal, given the different magnitude of the sensor of the 6d.
user46521
sent on November 30, 2017
Pros:Optimum, lightweight, excellent rendering at all focal points, flare resistance, filter acceptance, tropicalized, fast and accurate.
Cons:Missing distance on maf ring, bulky hood
Opinion:Taken to replace the zuiko 7 14, I found a worthy replacement. It's amazing how much quality can be found in 300 gr. rnWith great uptime throughout the frame, contrasted with the right and gorgeous color rendering.rnA 8mm 2.8 is very good for photos on the latte route.rnAll on olympus AF bodies fast and reliable.rn
Pros:Robust construction. Definition top and typically Leica yield. Possibility to put filters.
Cons:The high price? In fact ... I'm afraid you pay very high optical output in all parameters and all focal lengths
Opinion:The definition is very high, at the top. As I wrote about the "brother" 12-60: the latter, even remarkable, as a definition loses a thread in comparison ... just a thread but there is. Really the 8-18 has that ... 6th gear of the optics that amaze every image you see. The macrocontrasto, the separation of the planes, the rendering of the colors are from Leica, that is very appreciated for those who prefer this rendition, as the undersigned. After a month of testing I did not notice any focuses. Rn As already noted other "videomakers" the fact that f / 2.8 is so only 8mm and then very soon it is af / 4 is not a problem for those who, especially video like me, must almost always put ND filters to keep time on 1/50 of sec. And fortunately on this lens, unlike other 4/3 wide wrenches, the filters can be screwed ... rn
Pros:Small size, light weight, possibility to mount circular filters. Very beautiful colors and contrast, great flare resistance. Excellent sharpness.
Cons:In my view, the references to the manual focus ring are completely missing, there is only one dot. At night it would be useful to have the ring with the symbol of the infinite.
Opinion:Bought recently, I would say great. I replaced the Olympus 7-14 f.2.8, a fantastic lens but with flare problems. Also expensive and difficult to mount filters. For the pro see above. I appreciate the small size, lightness. What's more, the lens is guaranteed for 4 years. The focus is lightning.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
